We have done it. We are there. A sustainable world. An abundant, renewable clean energy. A recovering ecosystem and a biodiversity that we can now help improve instead of merely defend. Changes happened. Changes in politics, in tech, in culture. We waste less, we consider the long term impact of our decisions, we consider natural resources as atakeholders in our decisions and give them representatives.

Now what? Well, humans are debating about to do next and, big surprise, several factions are out there.

Extend the list, imagine factions collaborating or fighting, or detail a faction either seriously or tongue-in-cheekly

• Archaecologists argue that we should restore the ecosystem to a state close to the paleolithic before humans started damaging the planet. Their food is good but is a pain to peel.

• Ecovolutionists argue that the Anthropocene should not be ignored and that we should accept the profound impact we had on Earth, and let it run its natural course while we re-invent our way of life to have a lower impact. Their more radical branch releases genetically adapted version of endangered plants in human biomes. The Monsoon Red Concrete Mold is their proudest achievement.

• Biomaximizers think that some ecosystems are inherently more desirable than others: they argue that maximizing biodiversity and biomass should be our goal, that deserts should be turned into primal forests and that we should build reefs in the oceanic deserts. Their Saharan seed-bombing raves are rad.

• Biomoralists think we should raise the morality of the animal world and break the prey-predator mechanism, that nature is something to improve respectfully and humanely. Their vegan cat food is actually surprisingly tasty.

• Ecogardeners are in favor of biotopes that have biodiversity but also are welcoming of humans and nice to the eye. They are not fans of mosquitoes or wolves, but god do they love flowers.

• The Followers of Gaia want to maximize the consciousness of the biosphere by planting more telepathic organisms they can connect with. They are currently disagreeing on which species have the more psy power but I am sure they will end up agreeing on a list eventually. Their only consensus now is that sauge is good and who would disagree?

• Consumerists are for declaring natural reserves but embrace the ability to be “wasteful” again, now that recycling and energy uses are sustainable. I mean, I kinda get their point but renewable skiing in Dubai still feels like missing the point.

• Earth-conservationists argue we should all move to space and let the Earth grow back to its natural stage. They are bewildered that the archaecologists do not agree with what they essentially see the same goal.